APPENDIX. SOME CASES NOT HITHERTO REPORTED IN FULL. THE Centennial Appendix, at the end of Volume 131, contained two tables of omitted cases. In the first table the cases were reported in full. The second contained only a list of cases, term by term [see pages ccxx to ccxxxi], in which opinions were given which were supposed to decide the case on the facts; or on the authority of some case referred to; or in which the decision was made partly on the facts and partly on such authority; or in which judgment was entered either on the stipulation of the parties, or for incompleteness of the record, or for non-compliance with the rules of court. It was assumed that it was not worth while to occupy the space necessary to report these cases in full. The fact that two or three of them have been referred to in opinions of the court, since rendered, shows that this assumption was not well founded, and calls upon the reporter now to print them in full. UNITED STATES v. HARRISON. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. No. 126. Submitted April 21, 1852. — Decided April 23, 1852. The evidence and principles decided in this case are the same in substance with those in United States v. Philadelphia, 11 How. 609. THE case is stated in the opinion. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. The appellees in this case claim title to the land in question under certain instruments of writing executed by the Baron Carondelet in favor of the Baron Bastrop in 1796 and 1797, which are fully set out in the case of The United States v. The Cities of Philadelphia and New Orleans, reported in 11 How. 609. It was decided in that case that these instruments of writing did not convey to the Baron Bastrop a title to the lands therein described. The decree in this case in favor of the appellees must therefore be reversed and a mandate issued directing the District Court to enter a decree in favor of the United States and dismiss the petition. This case not to be reported, the evidence and principles decided being the same in substance with the case referred to in 11 Howard's Reports. Reversed. Mr. Attorney General for appellant. No appearance for appellees. UNITED STATES v. CARRÈRE. UNITED STATES v. GRAFTON. APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. Nos. 78 and 80. Submitted March 1, 1853. Decided March 3, 1853. Reversed upon the authority of United States v. Philadelphia & New Orleans, 11 How. 609. THE case is stated in the opinion. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. The appellees in these two cases claim title under an instrument of writing which they allege was a grant by the Spanish authorities to the Baron de Bastrop. In the case of The United States v. The Cities of Philadelphia and New Orleans and Livingston and Callender's Heirs, reported in 11 How. 609, the court decided that this instrument of writing conveyed no title to the Baron de Bastrop; and consequently the petitioners can derive no title to themselves under it. The decree in each of these cases must therefore be reversed and a mandate issued to the Circuit Court, directing the petitions to be dismissed. Mr. Attorney General for appellant. No appearance for appellees. Reversed. STEAMBOAT NIAGARA v. VAN PELT. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 69. Stipulation to dismiss filed December 11, 1854. - Decided February 15, 1855. This case is dismissed in accordance with the stipulation of counsel. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY announced the decree of the court. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, and it appearing to the court here by a stipulation on file, signed by the counsel for the respective parties, that the matters in controversy had been agreed and settled between them, and that the case should be dismissed without costs to either party as against the other, it is, thereupon, now here ordered and decreed by this court that this cause be, and the same is hereby, dismissed, and that each party pay their own costs in this court. Mr. Alexander Hamilton, Jr., for appellants. Dismissed. Mr. Marsh for appellees. COGGESHALL v. HARTSHORN. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. No. 60. Stipulation to reverse filed December 12, 1856. - Decided December 12, 1856. A decree is entered by consent of parties, modifying the decree of the court below. THE case is stated in the opinion. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY announced the decree of the court. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts and on the stipulation filed by the counsel of the respective parties that the following decree should be entered, on consideration whereof, and on the motion of Mr. Curtis, of counsel for the appellants, it is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed that so much of the decree of the Circuit Court as required payment by the appellants to the appellees of the sum of six thousand nine hundred and forty-five dollars and sixty-three cents and interest thereon as profits, and six hundred and ninety-one dollars and seventy-nine cents as costs, be, and the same is hereby, |